Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've just started looking at KDE and it's obviously a much slicker interface to Ubuntu than Gnome.

Any information available on how much additional hardware resources it takes to generate all that visual slickness?

I'm running Ubuntu on a 4 year old laptop with no dedicated graphics card (just the Intel Core Duo single-core graphics chip - whatever that's called). I'm concerned it might not be up to the task.

share|improve this question
    
What makes you say that KDE is "slicker"? – endolith Oct 13 '09 at 22:47
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Around 2 years old, but some very useful information here: Desktop Memory Usage. I found this page when comparing XFCE and GNOME a long time ago, lots of useful information.

share|improve this answer
    
Whoa. That's surprising. The results go completely against my intuition that KDE would be more resource-intensive than Gnome because it seems more graphics-heavy. It's just one test I guess, but still, quite surprising. Thanks. – lipton Sep 19 '09 at 3:43

What is described there is a previous version of KDE - the page is about 2 years old, as you noticed. The current KDE is TOTALLY changed with respect to that one and I'm quite certain that those conclusions no longer apply.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .